Vextol

I've always used nerf as 'make less effective' . If you hit someone with a baseball bat, it hurts. If you hit someone with a baseball bat wrapped in "nerf foam" it hurts way less. Ironically, people use the term "hit with the nerf bat" as a means of indicating they were weakened a lot... though... if you were hit with a "nerf bat" it shouldn't hurt that badly so I'd rather be hit with a nerf bat than hit with a bat and nerfed 😬 I like "nerf" when the effectiveness of a unit is reduced and "nerfed into the shadow realms" when a unit is ruined. Maybe we could say "Foam grand slam" if a unit is ruined. Keep those bat similies going.

Where are you seeing this? I want to know stuff!

I think everyone is pretty much on the same page but you bring up an interesting point! A flying unit at the base of a 4 inch object is not within 3 inches when measuring distance base to base so they would not be allowed to make a pile in move because they aren't within 3 inches. However, if they were allowed to make one they would potentially already be as close as possible...😵 Flying does matter when considering the distance required to summon (which was the initial point of the topic) because flying units seemingly can be summoned "closer" than ground units due to the advantage they get for ignoring vertical movement. Small perk. I do think that units that fly are always considered "flying" though. Actually, I don't know if it really matters. Outside movement and a few rules that reference "flying" models, the semantics of when something flies and doesn't aren't really burdensome. If you have to check a measurement before you do something, base to base is all that matters. Then you can do whatever you want "flying" wise.

Oh pththt on that (tongue out noise). You know what I mean! 😝 XB+B2 or for flying sqrt(81-2^2)....except not two the number, 2 the variable...see the problem! See why I wanted C?!.... But yeah.. We agree 😂

Wait.... C is at 2. C' is (basically) at B and 1. A model summoned at X would be 9 inches at the diagonal and sqrt(81-C^2) from the wall. Required charge for flying is XB and XB+BC for a walking model. I'm almost certain we're saying the same things! Assuming the wall is 4 inches tall, that would mean a summoned grounded model would have to make a 12 inch charge to the model on the wall and a flying model would need to make an 8 inch charge. Looks like a wall about 4.2 inches high is your best return for making charges difficult for any summoned unit! 😂

Got it. Straight line, base to base. Agreed. This one I think is off. I think you have to charge a distance XB+BC. You may be strictly speaking about flying units in which case I agree. The main crux is that by being 2 inches off the ground, you run almost no risk of being charged by grounded, summoned units. Pretty huge actually.

The movement portion I'm in 100% agreement. That is very clear. So, just checking if I understand your thoughts, you believe the summoning distance for any unit is a point between AB that's equal to 9-p1p2? That would mean if length p1p2 is equal to 9, the unit on the wall would be 9 inches away and the flying unit would be 0 inches away but not in combat until it charged, which would be a charge distance of 0 due to the fact that flying ignores vertical distance while moving?

My confusion came from summoning flying units. You could summon them into hand to hand combat if the wall was high enough. Just seemed very strange.

👍 Removed nonsense. I'm hoping for official doubles rules more than anything!

Asked this elsewhere but it wasn't really appropriate so I'm giving it its own topic. Is an objective: 1. A point with a flat 6" circle around it 2. A point with a half dome 6" bubble around it 6. A point with 6" cylinder around it that extends upward to eternity Obviously the size can vary but the question still stands.

Unrelated to the question, but coherence is 6". Huge distance so it would almost never matter, but there is obviously "some" 3D thinking. If all distances are measured straight and not angled and objectives extend to eternity that's a pretty huge buff to being on top of stuff near a point. You're basically another whole turn away from melee units! Not saying it's wrong BTW, just an observation.

Scenario: Walking, melee model is on a wall 4 inches tall. A flying summoner is 15 inches from said wall. They summon a walking melee model which must remain 9 inches away. So, what exactly does that mean? 1. Is the distance from the wall model measured down the wall 4 inches and then out from the wall 5? 2. Straight out from the wall directly below the model 9 inches? 3. At the angle pythagorean style 8.062 inches from the bottom of the wall and 9 inches away from the base of the wall model at an angle (guessing it's this one based on core rules)? 4. Does it matter that the summoner is flying (probably not)? 5. Would it matter if the unit on the wall was flying (probably not)? 6. I assume the straight line 9 inch measurement would be used if the summoned unit was flying. Thoughts? This one is interesting to me because if it's not the case and you still measure base to base straight line, flying units can technically be summoned "closer" than legally allowed simply based on the height of the opposing model (which is ignored by fliers). You could, in effect, summon a flying unit into combat if the opposing model was high enough. Came up because a building was on top of an objective and a tzeentch player was summoning a unit of brimstones and we weren't sure how far away to put them and how big of a charge they needed to make to hit the guy on the wall.

If I could recommend one thing, it would be that the surveys are more frequent, more targeted, and WAY shorter 😂 Edit: Removed nonsense.

I really hope they release the survey results (I don't know if they do). I hope a zillion people actually manage to fill it out😂 Edit: Removed nonsense.

The game definitely evolves and terminology changes definitely stick. The "reroll" change seems to be apparent. It definitely clears up confusion but I think rend is too rare and too valuable to begin with so hurting it at all is very dangerous. Edit: With the new khorne and fyreslayers books, the reroll wording is universal. This isn't a unit buff, it's a terminological change. It's a huge, questionably outlandish buff, especially for fyreslayers. Edit: Removed nonsense.

It's a buff, given. But I don't believe that this was a choice to make the rerolls "stronger". It just happened. I find it hard to believe that every "buff" that makes units stronger seems to be a "buff" that carries through conveniently to every new battletome just like I find it hard to believe that every "debuff" is a choice that happens to conveniently carry through to every new battletome. All 6+s are becoming "unmodified" and command abilities that are used in the combat phase always seem to kick off "at the start of the combat phase" with new battletomes. I would imagine that the Era of "reroll failed" is at its end just like new abilities getting off on 6+ are likely at their end. Its a natural evolution as the game continues to get fleshed out. When this year's storm cast book comes out I wouldn't be surprised if sequitors were either modified to account for the buff or their save was worsened or something. But I doubt there will be "failed" terminology going forward. And it does weaken rend, but I'd hardly say it's "removed". You still modify the save by 1 or more. It just weakens it a little. Honestly though, as mortal wounds become more prevalent (for better or worse) armies are more able to deal with these high save monsters.

I just hope we can agree both apparent options, double turn or alternating activation, are flawed and that the adoption of one over the other is not a solution itself without at least one or two other factors falling under consideration. Both sides make legitimate arguments. Whatever system is chosen CAN work, but neither will work well if they are implemented straight up. We have history to show this. Good to know! I really hope so. I agree with the update thing. How much discussion was there on how to deal with reroll and modifiers? Khorne and Fyreslayers battletomes both have statements like "reroll hits" instead of "failed hits". Obviously this is a way to battle the confusion about modifiers and reroll. A universal remove 'failed term' update would be fine with me and helps battle an unintentional but very real power creep that's really just a rules clarification. Edit: Removed nonsense.

But I'm rubber and you're glue! Whatever you say bounces off of me and sticks to you! Edit: I can't believe I forgot to add it to the survey... I'm going to go back and take it again 😫. I'd love some fleshed out Doubles rules. It's the primary way my group plays and there aren't any real rules for it. Also, are hidden agendas a real thing now or just a "beta test"? I think fleshing out that system could have some really cool benefits to balance in a lot of ways. Even turn order could be addressed some. Obviously now it's just triumphs but that could be tweaked. Any external, non-dice mechanism has a lot of power to change the internal balance of the game. Lots of potential.

Edit: Removed nonsense.

I think the initiative system is the worst part of AoS. Makes it really hard for me to evaluate my play sometimes because I can't tell if I did anything wrong. I don't think the argument should be over which system is better. Picking either one alone is the wrong decision. It's such an important part of the game there needs to be SOMETHING else involved. A way to allow players to determine or alter turn order tactically/randomly and not purely randomly. I don't understand the previous conversation bit. Sorry. Must be a little daft 😲 Edit: Removed nonsense.

Unquestionably the #1 complaint I heard from every person I ever played with (for the considerable amount of time I also played fantasy) was that the player who went first had a huge advantage. In the situation where a 30 inch ranged unit is "blasting you to pieces" on a double turn, what would you be doing to survive that if they didn't have the double turn? Hiding? Buffing saves or getting heroes away? Running toward them at full speed! That army you describe (longstrikes) is not uncommon. It's a potent army because it's fast, hits hard and has enormous range. It is however low on wounds and models and is expensive. I've personally played against it a ton. It was tricky to deal with at first, especially given the very natural "bubble" desire of AoS but I found it didn't matter how the turns went. If my army couldn't handle it, that's all there was to it. If you are worried about getting shot to death, take the endless wall spell. It's usable by all! Force them to be somewhere they don't want to be. I think the double turn gets blamed for a lot of evils it's not responsible for. Getting blasted to pieces by shooting (especially long range shooting) is an inevitability and your opponent pays a high price for that capacity. For the longstrike double shoot they give up staunch defender. That's a big sacrifice. Double turn or no there are 5 rounds of being shot and you're almost certainly going to take 2 of them to the face. Whether that happens turn 2 and 3 or 2 and 4, the problem isn't going away. We do! Realms of beasts is really fun because I actually have a reason to use a carmine dragon 😁 Edit: Removed nonsense.

You're not going back far enough. I'm going back to fantasy days. We've done my turn your turn. It's bad. And yes, I agree about magic. That was my point. Magic was so weak before the double turn potential. It still struggles offensively which is why you only see long range spells or buffs most of the time. Nagash doesn't count... And to say shooting benefits more from the double turn... I have to disagree. You may feel better about yourself because less of your units die as quickly, but shooting definitely benefits from the ability to always be one step back from you. I'm very likely to get within 18 inches of you if I know you can't charge me. I'm much less likely to do that if I think you may get to move twice. Not to mention as a defender if you get any defensive spells off (the only consistent useful spells if I can't get a double turn) , you have to get them off two times. Edit: Removed nonsense.

I think Igougo would need serious help. Offensive wizards have finally come back into their own. That's down the tubes. Shooting would get an even bigger boost. I don't understand why people who worry about shooting are anti double turn. Get rid of it and now you just get shot incrementally at a distance you can't bridge instead of all at once with a chance of double moving. Slower melee units gets a swift kick to the groin. I feel like people don't remember how it was. There was this stupid standoff where everyone stayed at just enough of a distance that if you move, you have to make a ridiculous charge or else on my turn, I could move in and kill you. So combat was this weird little dance where everyone kind of waited for the other guy to mess up. All the while, wizards tried to inch in and the opposition just backed away or sideways a little. What did this lead to? Shooting armies. The only units that could do anything. Or crazy defensive armies that could take that first hit when you inevitably failed your charge. It's definitely a step backwards.

Ha! You picked the ONLY army that needs special consideration but even there, not really. You did nail the issue though. It potentially changes "nothing" while changing a ton at the same time. Isn't that the kind of rule change that we need? Something that at worst is the same and at best can completely change how initiative is handled in a much more tactical way? As you said, at very worst it's the same (and really only with idoneth). However, it's not really the same because now your opponent knows for sure you're throwing all 5 dice. They can guarantee themselves every first turn except the third if they want. Also, it's a nice buff to idoneth who rely THE MOST on a favorable initiative roll. Try it in a game mate! This wasn't my idea, so I can't claim credit. However, I've played 10 games (as of last night) using this, including with idoneth, and it's a really fun mechanic. I am SUPER anti house rules so it hurts me a little every time, but it really makes the experience more enjoyable.

Each player starts the battle with 5 'tactic dice' they can use to alter their initiative roll. Before each initiative roll, players choose in secret how many of their tactic dice they're going to roll along with their initiative die. Highest total wins. Each die can be used once per battle. Boom. You now have tactical control over turn order and haven't messed with the fundamentals of the game at all. Also, you can adequately prepare on BOTH sides to either get hit with the double turn or receive the double turn. Igougo completely changes the game. The game is in a really good place right now. Even balance wise I'm seeing a much better job (hearthguard berzerkers possibly excluded 🙄). If we go back to igougo with no creative way to fix the absolutely dreadful "first player wins" scenario, I'm worried everything will come undone... again... As for waiting forever, people play tournament games in like 1.5 hours. That's a max of 18 minutes of waiting assuming there's no save rolls and no combat. I wonder how people can ever paint their stuff if 18 minutes is enough to wear you down. If your opponent is taking forever, bring a chess timer. I love using a chess timer in my "long" games. Helps everyone focus.